Long-Read Sequencing Applications in Complex Genome Analysis

Introduction: Why Long-Read Sequencing Matters for Complex Genomes

In genomics, complexity breeds ambiguity. Many reference genomes remain fragmented or misassembled in repetitive or GC-rich regions—places where short-read sequencing routinely fails. Today's long-read sequencing technologies offer a path to resolve these blind spots, enabling direct insight into structural variation, phased haplotypes, and full-length transcripts that were previously out of reach.

Long reads (tens to hundreds of kilobases) provide several critical advantages over short-read methods. They span repetitive elements and large insertions or deletions in one contiguous stretch, reducing ambiguity in alignment and assembly (Amarasinghe et al., 2020). They also simplify variant calling in complex genomic loci, because fewer breaks in read continuity mean fewer false splits or misjoins. As a result, projects aiming to detect structural variants or phase alleles can often obtain much greater sensitivity and specificity using long reads.

In non-clinical research contexts—such as functional genomics, evolutionary studies, or biopharma target discovery—long-read sequencing is no longer a niche tool. It is becoming essential for fully characterising genome architecture, especially in organisms with large or polyploid genomes. The newer chemistries and bioinformatics developments have pushed base accuracy, throughput, and cost to competitive levels (Wohlers et al., 2023). At this turning point, researchers planning complex genome analysis must ask: when are long reads the right choice, and how can they deliver the resolution that short reads cannot?

For readers new to genome-wide methods, you can review the fundamentals in What Is Whole Genome Sequencing?, which explains how full-genome coverage enables comprehensive variant discovery.

Platform Comparison: PacBio HiFi vs Oxford Nanopore

To choose the right long-read sequencing strategy, one must compare the leading platforms—PacBio HiFi and Oxford Nanopore (ONT)—in terms of accuracy, read length, throughput, and practical utility. Below is a balanced comparison grounded in peer-reviewed literature and technical benchmarks.

2.1 Sequencing Principles & Error Profiles

PacBio HiFi (SMRT + Circular Consensus Sequencing):

PacBio generates multiple passes around a circularized DNA fragment (SMRTbell), then forms a consensus ("HiFi") read of very high accuracy (often >99 % per base).

Errors tend to be stochastic (random substitutions, indels), which consensus calling can largely suppress.

Oxford Nanopore (Nanopore Current Sensing):

ONT sequences by threading a nucleic acid strand through a nanopore and measuring changes in ionic current to infer bases.

Its errors are more systematic, especially in homopolymeric runs or complex current shifts.However, ONT's chemistry and base-calling algorithms have improved dramatically in recent years, reducing error rates significantly.

2.2 Read Length, Throughput, and Contiguity

Read length:

ONT can routinely deliver ultra-long reads, sometimes exceeding 1 Mb in optimal conditions.

PacBio HiFi reads typically fall in a range of ≈ 10–25 kb, balancing length and accuracy.

Throughput & contiguity:

In one comparative study using a rice genome, ONT's ultra-long reads produced a more contiguous assembly (18 contigs, 10 chromosome-level) compared to PacBio's HiFi reads (394 contigs, 3 chromosome-level).

However, PacBio HiFi assemblies consistently show lower base-level error rates and fewer small indels or miscalled bases than ONT assemblies.

Trade-off:

ONT's strength in bridging very long repeats helps reduce fragmentation and resolve structural complexity, whereas PacBio's strength lies in cleaner, base-accurate assemblies with fewer downstream correction steps.

2.3 Accuracy and Variant Calling

PacBio HiFi's high per-base fidelity makes it well-suited for small variant detection, precise structural variant boundary calling, and confident phasing.

ONT, despite lower inherent accuracy, benefits from algorithmic error correction (e.g. polishing, neural base-callers) and improved chemistry to approach competitive accuracy in many contexts.

For applications where breakpoint precision matters (e.g. structural variant mapping), the higher confidence of HiFi may reduce false positives and ambiguous boundaries.

2.4 Practical Considerations & Use Cases

Latency / Real-time sequencing:

ONT offers streaming data in real time, which is advantageous in contexts needing immediate feedback, such as field experiments or dynamic sample decisions.

Instrument cost and scalability:

ONT's platforms have lower entry cost and more modular scale (e.g. MinION or PromethION) compared to PacBio's systems.

Library prep complexity:

PacBio's library prep, especially for HiFi, is more demanding in DNA quality and size constraints. ONT is more tolerant of longer fragments and native DNA/RNA modifications.

Transcriptomics & RNA sequencing:

Comparative studies (LRGASP consortium, Pardo-Palacios et al. 2023) show that PacBio Iso-Seq often recovers more full-length isoforms and more genes at lower read depths compared to ONT data.

ONT has strengths in throughput and flexibility for RNA sequencing but sometimes suffers more 5′/3′ truncation and artefactual monoexonic reads.

Recommend reading

PacBio vs Oxford Nanopore: Which Long-Read Sequencing Technology is Right for Your Research

Figure 1: Contiguity of the ONT and PacBio assemblies.

Structural Variant Detection

Structural variants (SVs)—insertions, deletions, inversions, duplications, translocations, and complex rearrangements (≥ 50 bp)—are among the most consequential forms of genome variation. Long-read sequencing opens a window into these events that short reads often miss. Below, I describe how long reads enhance SV detection, the algorithmic strategies used, practical considerations, and real examples that illustrate the power (and pitfalls) of this approach.

3.1 Why structural variant detection benefits from long reads

Span full breakpoints and flanking context.

Because long reads may extend across the entire variant locus and its flanking unique sequences, they allow direct alignment across insertion or deletion junctions—even in repetitive regions. This greatly improves breakpoint resolution and reduces ambiguous calls.

Resolve complex events.

Long reads can capture nested or compound SVs (e.g. insertion + inversion, translocations adjoining duplications) in a single molecule. Short reads, fragmented across boundaries, tend to fragment or miss these events entirely.

Detect novel sequence insertions.

Inserted sequences absent from the reference genome are problematic for short reads. Long reads can carry novel insertions end-to-end, enabling alignment-based discovery of previously unmapped sequence.

Better in repetitive or low-complexity regions.

Many SVs occur in segmental duplications, tandem repeats, or low-complexity tracts. By bridging across repeats, long reads reduce ambiguous mapping and misattribution of variant signals.

These strengths have been borne out in benchmarking and empirical studies: long-read strategies uncover thousands of SVs missed by short-read approaches (Dierckxsens et al., 2021).

Figure 2: Structural variants strategies Based on three HiFi

3.2 Algorithmic strategies: Read-based vs Assembly-based SV calling

There are two broad computational approaches to deriving SVs from long-read data: read-based and assembly-based. Each has strengths and trade-offs (Lin et al., 2023).

Key observations from benchmarks:

• Up to ~80 % of SVs are concordant between read- and assembly-based strategies on standard human datasets, especially insertions/deletions in non-repetitive zones.
• Discordance often arises in inversions or very large rearrangements in complex loci, where alignment ambiguity or contig misjoins differ between approaches.
• Read-based strategies achieve reasonable recall (≈ 77 %) at low (5×) coverage, whereas assembly-based methods need ~20× or more to reach similar sensitivity.
• Many tool pipelines now "merge" calls from read- and assembly-based methods to maximize sensitivity and precision.

Thus, an integrative pipeline that uses both strategies (especially in high-value, complex-genome projects) often yields the most comprehensive SV callset.

To decide whether your structural variant project requires full-genome or targeted coverage, see our comparison article Whole Genome vs Targeted Sequencing: Which Should You Choose?.

3.3 Frequently used long-read SV callers and recent advances

Many long-read SV callers have emerged in the past decade, using various heuristics or machine learning enhancements (Ahsan et al., 2023, Nature Methods) . Some of the most widely used include:

• Sniffles / Sniffles2 – A robust, read-based tool that detects split-read and supplementary alignment signatures, widely used as benchmark.
• cuteSV – Emphasizes clustering of signature signals and breakpoint refinement.
• SVIM – Modular collector of intra-read and inter-read signals for multiple SV types.
• pbsv – PacBio's native SV calling tool optimized for HiFi datasets.
• PAV, SVIM-ASM – Assembly-based callers that analyze contig–reference alignments to identify structural differences.

Recent advances include the integration of deep learning to reduce false positives and better model complex signals:

• SVHunter (transformer-based) has shown reduced false-discovery rates across platforms by modeling global alignment patterns.
• cnnLSV encodes alignment neighborhoods into images, uses CNNs to filter and refine SV calls, and demonstrated improved performance across SV types.
• Alignment improvements, e.g. HQAlign for nanopore data, enhance breakpoint precision by modeling nanopore current-level error biases (Joshi et al.).

When designing a pipeline, one can combine multiple tools and then perform filtering, consensus merging, or validation to boost accuracy.

3.4 Best practices & practical considerations

To deploy SV detection robustly in real projects, keep the following in mind:

Coverage & read length trade-off

Benchmarking suggests ~20× coverage with mean read length ~20 kb and error rate ≤1 % yields good performance for many SV callers.

Past that, gains in recall plateau while cost continues to increase.

Aligner choice matters

Tools such as minimap2, ngmlr, and lra show different sensitivities. Misalignments/mismatches can generate spurious SV signatures (Lin et al. 2023)

Specialized aligners like HQAlign help mitigate nanopore-specific error modes (Joshi et al.).

Low-complexity / repeat regions remain challenging

Recent work shows that although low-complexity regions represent ~1–2 % of the genome, they contain a disproportionate fraction of SV errors—77–91 % of miscalls occur in such regions.

False positives and filtering

High-depth data and multiple tool outputs tend to increase false-positive calls. Merging, cross-tool consensus, read-level validation, and manual curation help mitigate this.

Validation & orthogonal confirmation

Wherever possible, confirm key SVs (especially novel or high-impact ones) using orthogonal methods—PCR, optical mapping, or targeted ultra-long sequencing.

3.5 Example Use Case: Cancer Genome Rearrangements

One compelling example comes from applying long-read sequencing to cancer genomes, where SVs can drive oncogenesis via fusions, complex rearrangements, or copy-number alterations.

In one study, long-read sequencing uncovered multiple chromothripsis events and compound translocations in tumor samples that were fragmented or misinterpreted in short-read data (reviewed in "Application of long-read sequencing to the detection of structural variants").

In another application, combining SV calling with phased long reads enabled reconstruction of allele-specific rearrangements, which helped disentangle driver versus passenger events in heterogeneous tumor samples.

These real-world successes highlight how long-read SV detection yields biological insight rather than just variant catalogs.

Haplotype Phasing and Allele-Specific Analysis

Phasing—assigning variants to their parental chromosome copy—is vital for interpreting cis versus trans genetic effects. Long-read sequencing enables more direct and extended phasing than short reads allow, and it unlocks allele-specific analyses of expression, methylation, or variant interactions. Below I describe how long reads improve phasing, algorithmic strategies, pitfalls to avoid, and real examples that demonstrate the impact in research.

4.1 Why phasing matters: cis/trans distinction and allele-specific regulation

Cis vs trans interpretation

Many functional questions depend on whether two variants lie on the same chromosome (cis) or opposite ones (trans). For example, two regulatory variants in cis may synergize, whereas in trans their effects might cancel or interact differently.

Allele-specific expression (ASE) and regulation

Phasing RNA reads to haplotypes allows quantification of allele-specific expression or splicing. This is critical for understanding imprinting, regulatory variant effect sizes, or allelic imbalance in response to treatment.

Compound heterozygosity and dosage effects

In research contexts exploring combinations of variants, phasing helps determine whether damaging alleles co-occur on the same haplotype or on different ones—a nuance with implications for functional modeling.

Resolving allele-specific methylation and epigenetic states

New methods (e.g. MethPhaser) use methylation patterns in long reads to extend phasing blocks beyond SNVs, integrating epigenetic state into haplotype resolution (Fu et al., 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egg.2023.100181).

Thus, robust phasing provides a deeper layer of insight over variant catalogs alone.

4.2 Phasing strategies with long reads: read-based, assembly-based, and hybrid approaches

Similar to SV calling, phasing with long reads uses multiple computational strategies. Below is a comparison of typical approaches and their trade-offs:

Benchmarking suggests that long reads at ~25–30× coverage allow phasing of >95 % of heterozygous SNVs into long blocks (Zhao et al., 2025. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaf247) (for bulk sequencing). Integration with parental or pedigree data further reduces switch errors.

Moreover, in cutting-edge single-cell or gamete sequencing, long reads enable chromosome-wide phasing of both SNVs and structural variants. For example, Xie et al. (2023) achieved ~98.6 % accuracy for SV phasing across sperm genomes using long-read sequencing doi: 10.1093/nar/gkad532.).

4.3 Common pitfalls and considerations in haplotype phasing

While long reads offer powerful phasing capabilities, several caveats must be acknowledged:

Error-induced phasing errors

High error rates (especially in older ONT chemistries) can introduce incorrect alleles, leading to switch or flip errors. Lowering base-calling error and polishing helps mitigate this.

PCR chimera artifacts in amplicon-based approaches

Amplification-based strategies can generate chimeric reads, which mislead phasing. Laver et al. (2016) demonstrated spurious haplotypes when phasing remotely spaced variants due to chimeras (DOI:10.1038/srep21746).

Sparse heterozygosity breaks blocks

Regions with low variant density (such as long homozygous tracts) may interrupt phasing unless bridged by ultra-long reads or supplementary data (e.g. Hi-C).

Alignment bias and reference allele bias

Reads may preferentially align to reference alleles in ambiguous contexts, especially near indels or repeats. This can skew phasing assignments.

Switch errors in MEC-based methods

Some haplotype assembly algorithms rely on Minimum Error Correction (MEC) models. For noisy long-read data, the MEC optimum may not correspond to true haplotypes; simulation studies showed erroneous haplotypes at lower coverages (Majidian et al., 2018).

Mitigation strategies include:

• Using dual-strategy phasing (read + assembly)
• Filtering low-confidence variant calls
• Post-hoc switch correction
• Incorporating orthogonal linkage data (e.g. Hi-C, Strand-seq)

4.4 Research use cases: phasing in population genomics and regulatory studies

Single-sperm phasing of SVs and SNVs

Xie et al. applied long-read sequencing to single sperm, resolving chromosome-scale haplotypes and phasing structural variants with ~98.6 % accuracy (DOI:10.1093/nar/gkad532). This method enables direct phasing without parental data and provides a model for germline studies.

Concurrent haplotyping and single-cell variant calling

Zhao et al. used long-read whole-genome sequencing in single cells to call SNVs, indels, SVs, and phase variants concurrently. They achieved 92–98 % phasing accuracy at large scale (Zhao et al., 2025. oi: 10.1093/nar/gkaf247).

Methylation-aided extension of phase blocks

Fu et al. integrated methylation signal into ONT phasing via MethPhaser, increasing phase block length (N50) by 78-151 % and extending phasing into low-variant regions (Fu et al., 2024).

In all these cases, researchers moved from variant catalogs to allele-specific context, which guides interpretation of regulatory variation, epigenomic differences, and cis-effects.

Full-Length Transcript and Isoform Analysis

Long-read sequencing has transformed transcriptomics by enabling direct sequencing of intact RNA molecules from end to end. This capability unlocks more precise isoform discovery, quantification, and insight into transcript diversity that short reads seldom achieve. Below, I explain how full-length transcript sequencing works, strategies and pitfalls, and real-world applications that show its value in research.

5.1 Why full-length transcript sequencing matters

Avoids assembly ambiguity

Short-read RNA data must be computationally stitched (assembled) into transcripts, which often leads to misassignment among isoforms sharing exons. Long reads can cover entire splice forms, eliminating that ambiguity (Santucci et al., 2024. DOI:10.1093/bfgp/elae031).

Discovers novel and complex isoforms

Long reads identify previously unannotated splice variants, intron retention, alternative promoter usage, and fusion transcripts more reliably (Nature Methods benchmarking).

Improved isoform quantification

Because entire transcript molecules are observed, read-to-isoform attribution becomes more accurate. Tools like LIQA weight each read by quality and length to improve abundance estimates. (Hu et al., 2021).

Supports allele-specific transcript expression and splicing

When coupled with phasing data, full-length reads can link splicing variation to haplotypes, revealing allele-specific isoform regulation.

5.2 Strategies and tool choices: workflow & challenges

Library preparation & protocol options

• cDNA vs direct RNA

Many workflows convert RNA → cDNA and amplify, which increases throughput but may introduce bias or truncation. Direct RNA sequencing (e.g., ONT) avoids reverse-transcription artifacts and can preserve RNA modifications, but yields lower throughput and more 3′ bias.

• Full-length selection and size-fractionation

Selecting for full-length transcripts (e.g. via Cap selection or poly(A) tail strategies) helps maximize recovery of complete isoforms while minimizing fragments.

Computational pipeline & tool strategies

• Read alignment & splice-aware mapping

Aligners like minimap2, deSALT or FLAMES are tuned to long-read spliced alignment. Accurate splice-junction detection is crucial for isoform identification.

• Isoform clustering and collapsing

Many reads represent the same isoform. Clustering (collapse) tools such as Iso-Seq pipeline (PacBio's ICE/CCS/Polish), IsoQuant, or FLAMES group reads into transcript models (IsoQuant is a newer option).

• Transcript quantification & bias correction

Tools like LIQA assign weights to reads given error and truncation biases. Some methods adopt EM algorithms to refine isoform counts (e.g. LIQA).

• Validation and filtering of artifacts

Spurious isoforms may arise from misalignment, template switching, or partial reads. Rigorous filtering and cross-sample consistency checks help validate genuine isoforms.

• Benchmarking and consensus calling

The LRGASP / LR-RNA-Seq benchmark consortium evaluated dozens of methods, finding that accuracy depends on balancing read length, error rate, and coverage. (LRGASP, 2024).

5.3 Pitfalls and practical considerations

Read truncation / 5′ or 3′ bias

Some reads may be truncated (especially in ONT direct RNA), skewing isoform counts toward shorter or partial transcripts. Benchmarking shows that PCR-amplified cDNA and IsoSeq approaches tend to provide more uniform coverage across transcript length.

Error-induced splice miscalls

Sequence errors near splice junctions may lead to false novel splice sites. Polishing and consensus clustering help mitigate this.

Low expression transcripts and noise

Rare isoforms may be represented by few reads, making them vulnerable to false positives. Replicate data and consistency filters are important.

Complex loci with overlapping isoforms

Genes with many splice variants or nested transcripts remain challenging, especially in species without high-quality reference annotation.

Reference bias in novel discovery

When using a reference-guided model, truly novel isoforms missing from annotation may be missed or misaligned. De novo isoform discovery dependencies vary among tools (LRGASP findings).

5.4 Example applications: isoform diversity and regulatory insight

AML transcriptome diversity

In acute myeloid leukemia, Shi et al. used long-read sequencing to discover over 119,000 previously unannotated transcripts. Isoform-level profiles defined molecular subtypes and revealed regulatory RNA diversity (Shi et al. 2025. DOI:10.1016/j.xcrm.2025.101057).

Isoform-level eQTL (ieQTL) mapping

A study on 67 B-cell lines applied Oxford Nanopore full-length RNA sequencing to detect isoform-specific QTLs (ieQTLs) in a population context. Many ieQTLs had been missed by short-read approaches.

Benchmarking transcript protocols

The SG-NEx project benchmarked multiple long-read RNA protocols across human cell lines and demonstrated that long-read data more robustly identify major isoforms and detect fusions or novel transcripts than short-read methods.

These examples underscore how full-length transcript sequencing deepens insight into transcription complexity, alternative splicing regulation, and functional isoform discovery in systems biology and R&D.

For researchers exploring transcript quantification and coverage optimization, our guide Deep Sequencing: When Depth Equals Discovery discusses how sequencing depth influences detection of rare isoforms.

When to Use Long-Read Sequencing

Deciding when to invest in long-read sequencing is as crucial as understanding how to use it. In this section, I provide guidelines and decision criteria to help researchers—as in CROs, pharma R&D, or academic labs—evaluate whether long reads are the right tool for their project objectives.

6.1 Key decision criteria: project goals, genome complexity, and variant types

When assessing suitability, consider these core factors:

Target variant types and resolution requirements

If your study aims to detect structural variants, novel insertions, complex rearrangements, or needs precise breakpoint boundaries, long reads provide significant advantage over short-read methods.

Phasing, allele-specific complexity, or haplotype resolution

When you need to assign variants to haplotypes, explore allele-specific expression/splicing, or understand cis-regulatory effects, long reads are often essential.

Genome architecture and repetitiveness

In organisms with highly repetitive, GC-rich, or polyploid genomes (plants, fungi, large genomes), long reads help resolve ambiguity and reduce assembly fragmentation.

Novel or reference-poor genomes

For de novo assemblies or poorly annotated species, long reads increase contiguity, reduce gaps, and simplify structural interpretation.

Transcriptome complexity

If your goal is to map full-length isoforms, fusions, chimeric transcripts, or splice variants, long-read RNA sequencing offers capabilities that short reads struggle to deliver.

Cost, throughput, and sample constraints

If your project demands ultra-high depth (>100×) or hosts many samples, cost-per-base and throughput might favor short reads or hybrid strategies. Also, sample DNA quality (fragmentation, input mass) may limit what is feasible in long-read library prep.

6.2 Rule-of-thumb decision matrix

Below is a simplified decision table to guide technology choice:

If your objective aligns with ≥ 2 "Prefer Long-Read" entries, then long-read sequencing is likely justified.

6.3 Typical coverage and read-length thresholds for effective use

From benchmarking and empirical practice:

Coverage

A coverage of ~15-25× is often sufficient for robust structural variant detection and moderate phasing. For highly complex genomes, >30× may be preferable.

Read length distribution

Mean read lengths of 15–25 kb or more help bridge many repeats. Ultra-long reads (>100 kb) further enable spanning of centromeres or extremely long tandem arrays.

Quality / error rate

Platforms with high per-base accuracy (e.g. PacBio HiFi) reduce the need for deep polishing. Error-corrected or consensus-level reads improve sensitivity and specificity.

These thresholds derive from comparative studies (e.g. LRGASP benchmarking) and field practice.

6.4 Use-case scenarios illustrating "why long-read is appropriate"

Here are concrete scenarios where long-read sequencing becomes the clear choice:

Gene-editing QC & off-target detection

After CRISPR editing, PCR or targeted short reads may miss unexpected large insertions, deletions, or rearrangements. Using long-read sequencing, scientists have discovered unanticipated edits—such as 1–2 kb insertions or complex rearrangements—that would remain invisible.

De novo assembly of a polyploid plant genome

In crops with multiple homologous chromosomes and repetitive content, long reads reduce scaffolding ambiguity, close gaps, and distinguish homeologous chromosome segments.

Full-length isoform mapping in a disease model

When alternative splicing or fusion transcripts are central to mechanistic hypotheses, short reads may misassign exons/introns. Long reads capture entire transcript molecules end-to-end, enabling more confident isoform calls.

Exploratory genomics of non-model species

For a newly studied organism without a reference, long reads accelerate the creation of a contiguous genome and reveal structural variation from the start.

6.5 When not to prioritize long-read sequencing

There are scenarios where long reads may not offer sufficient benefit for the added cost or complexity:

• If the key variants of interest are single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or small indels in non-repetitive regions, well-covered short reads may suffice.
• Studies needing ultra-deep coverage across many samples (e.g. population-wide SNP screens) where cost per base is limiting.
• When input DNA is highly degraded or low yield, constraints may preclude long-read library prep.
• Projects already well served by hybrid or integrated approaches with validated pipelines.

How Long Reads Improve Genome Assembly Quality

Accurate, contiguous genome assemblies are foundational to many omics analyses. Long reads dramatically enhance assembly metrics by bridging repetitive sequences, reducing gaps, and resolving structural complexity. In this section, I explain the mechanistic basis, bioinformatic strategies, and real-life successes enabled by long-read assembly.

7.1 The core challenge: repeats, structural complexity, and ambiguity in short-read assembly

Short reads (100–300 bp) often fail to resolve repetitive regions, segmental duplications, and GC-rich tracts. Assemblers must fragment contigs at ambiguous overlaps, collapse repeats, or misassemble similar sequences. In contrast, long reads (≥10 kb) can span those repeats entirely, restoring unique flanking context and enabling unambiguous contig joins.

Complex genomes—such as plants, fungi, large vertebrates, or polyploids—exacerbate this problem because they have abundant repeats and homeologous segments. The inability of short reads to disambiguate such regions often results in highly fragmented assemblies. The rise of long-read sequencing has helped overcome these limitations.

7.2 Mechanisms by which long reads boost assembly contiguity

Below are the principal ways long reads improve assembly:

Bridging repetitive and structurally complex regions

Long reads routinely span repeats, inversions, or tandem arrays, providing unbroken megabase-scale context that links unique flanking sequences.

The Telomere-to-Telomere (T2T) human assembly used ultra-long nanopore reads combined with HiFi reads to fully resolve centromeres, rDNA arrays, and other formerly intractable loci.

Reducing scaffold gaps and misjoins

When contigs can be joined with long-read evidence (or scaffolding tools using long reads), fewer unresolved gaps remain. Misjoins, often introduced when repeat edges are incorrectly oriented, diminish because the long spans reduce ambiguity.

Resolving heterozygosity and distinguishing alleles

In diploid or polyploid genomes, heterozygous variants can mislead assemblers. Long reads help disambiguate haplotypes by preserving phasing information across long blocks, reducing collapse of divergent alleles. The T2T-CHM13 project, though a haploid line, exemplifies the power of long reads in achieving a truly gapless reference.

Improved base-level accuracy via polishing and consensus

After initial contig building, aligning long reads back to the assembly and performing iterative polishing corrects residual base errors or indel miscalls. Algorithms like Apollo (universal polisher) can combine reads from multiple technologies to refine assemblies.

Scaffolding using long-read-based linking evidence

Some long reads can bridge contigs without full assembly overlap. Tools like ntLink use long-read scaffolding to order/orient contigs, fill gaps, and detect misassemblies.

7.3 Best practices and trade-offs in long-read assembly

While long reads offer large gains, thoughtful strategy is essential:

Assembler choice matters

Comparative benchmarks (e.g. "Evaluating long-read de novo assembly tools for eukaryotic genomes") show that no single assembler dominates all metrics. Choice depends on genome size, heterozygosity, and target contiguity.

Coverage and read length thresholds

Assemblies benefit from ~20–30× "HiFi-equivalent" long-read coverage with a distribution favoring long reads (15+ kb). Ultra-long reads (>100 kb) further help in especially recalcitrant regions.

Hybrid polishing and multi-step refinement

Even "high-accuracy" long-read assemblies can contain residual indel or mismatch errors. Multi-round polishing (long-read self-polish, then short-read or hybrid polishing) reduces error rates. Polishing strategies should consider platform-specific biases.

Controlling chimeras and misassemblies

Spurious chimeric reads or misjoins can corrupt contig integrity. Validation through orthogonal data (optical maps, Hi-C, linked reads) helps identify and correct structural errors.

Computational resources and algorithm complexity

Large genomes and high coverage require substantial memory and CPU. Some assemblers optimize memory usage or chunk the problem. Always test small subsets to benchmark resource demands.

7.4 Landmark achievements: gapless and near-complete assemblies

T2T-CHM13 human assembly

The Telomere-to-Telomere project delivered a fully gapless human genome, resolving centromeric, rDNA, satellite, and segmental duplication regions that previous references could not.

This assembly revealed novel genetic content, corrected misassemblies, and improved variant calling in repetitive loci.

Assemblies from previously challenging species

A recent study used modified HiFi protocols on ethanol-preserved museum samples to assemble the 3.1 Gb maned sloth genome with high contiguity, surpassing legacy constraints on specimen type.

Such results demonstrate that even "difficult" input materials can yield excellent long-read assemblies when protocols and coverage are optimized.

Near T2T assemblies using nanopore ultra-long

Ongoing work is achieving gapless (or near-gapless) assemblies with nanopore-only data, especially when augmented with scaffolding methods or proximity ligation (Pore-C, Hi-C).

These success stories confirm that long-read sequencing has matured to the point where reference-grade assemblies are feasible for non-clinical research projects.

Conclusion

Long-read sequencing has matured into a must-have tool for dissecting complex genomes. Its ability to span repetitive regions, resolve structural variants with precision, phase alleles over long distances, and reveal full-length transcripts transforms what was once "dark matter" in genome biology into accessible insight. In projects where structural variation, allele-specific regulation, or de novo assembly are central, long reads can unlock discoveries that short reads simply cannot deliver.

That said, successful implementation depends on thoughtful design: matching coverage, read length, error corrections, aligners, and SV / phasing pipelines to your biological questions. The case studies above—from cancer genomes to polyploid crops—demonstrate that the investment pays off in clarity of interpretation, higher variant yield, and real mechanistic insight.

If your team is preparing for a complex genome analysis, transcriptome project, or structural variant exploration, we'd be pleased to partner with you. At CD Genomics, our long-read sequencing services cover every step: experimental design, sample QC, library prep, sequencing (PacBio HiFi or Oxford Nanopore), and custom bioinformatics pipelines (structural variant calling, phasing, isoform detection).

Next steps you can take now:

• Contact us to discuss your sample type, genomic complexity, and project goals
• Request a quote tailored to your coverage, read-length, and throughput needs
• Review our long-read sequencing service details and data deliverables.

Let's move from ambiguity to clarity — bring us your toughest genome problem, and we'll help you design a long-read strategy that delivers actionable insights.

References:

1. Amarasinghe, S.L., Su, S., Dong, X. et al. Opportunities and challenges in long-read sequencing data analysis. Genome Biol 21, 30 (2020).
2. Wohlers I, Garg S, Hehir-Kwa JY. Editorial: Long-read sequencing-Pitfalls, benefits and success stories. Front Genet. 2023 Jan 4;13:1114542. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.1114542. PMID: 36685894; PMCID: PMC9845275.
3. Dandan Lang, Shilai Zhang, Pingping Ren, Fan Liang, Zongyi Sun, Guanliang Meng, Yuntao Tan, Xiaokang Li, Qihua Lai, Lingling Han, Depeng Wang, Fengyi Hu, Wen Wang, Shanlin Liu, Comparison of the two up-to-date sequencing technologies for genome assembly: HiFi reads of Pacific Biosciences Sequel II system and ultralong reads of Oxford Nanopore, GigaScience, Volume 9, Issue 12, December 2020, giaa123,
4. Dierckxsens, N., Li, T., Vermeesch, J.R. et al. A benchmark of structural variation detection by long reads through a realistic simulated model. Genome Biol 22, 342 (2021).
5. Jiadong Lin, Peng Jia, Songbo Wang, Walter Kosters, Kai Ye, Comparison and benchmark of structural variants detected from long read and long-read assembly, Briefings in Bioinformatics, Volume 24, Issue 4, July 2023, bbad188,
6. Zhao Y, Tsuiko O, Jatsenko T, Peeters G, Souche E, Geysens M, Dimitriadou E, Vanhie A, Peeraer K, Debrock S, Van Esch H, Vermeesch JR. Long-read whole-genome sequencing-based concurrent haplotyping and aneuploidy profiling of single cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2025 Mar 20;53(6):gkaf247. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkaf247. PMID: 40167327; PMCID: PMC11959539.
7. Xie H, Li W, Guo Y, Su X, Chen K, Wen L, Tang F. Long-read-based single sperm genome sequencing for chromosome-wide haplotype phasing of both SNPs and SVs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023 Aug 25;51(15):8020-8034. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkad532. PMID: 37351613; PMCID: PMC10450174.